Q&A

Q:How is flair used here?A: Currently, we use flairs for offices. If you see users flaired, they have been verified by the moderators. We are unlikely to have self-applied flair anytime in the near future (search for the topic here to understand why).

We've had a few discussions about creating a FAQ for /r/Catholicism, but one of the big challenges is simply taking the time to write everything down in a user-friendly format. The mods have decided to outsource the FAQ to the readers of /r/Catholicism to help with the process. We're picking a topic each Monday, and we'd like everyone that's interested to contribute what they think should be in the FAQ. The mods will then go through the responses the following Monday and edit it into a readable version for the FAQ.

Feel free to ask a question or write out a summary on the topic from a Catholic perspective, but please don't copy and paste from other sites like newadvent.org.

As an added bonus, we may add special flair for those that contribute regularly to the weekly FAQ discussions with useful posts.

This week's topic is the Bible!

Here's a list of the previous FAQ's if you'd like to still contribute:

Because I have posted on this multiple times before, I am just going to jump in and preempt some questions regarding the compilation of the Christian Canon.

Here is a brief history on the compilation of the Canon of Christian Scriptures:

The Muratorian Fragment is the oldest known list of the canon of Scriptures, dating between 170 and 300, and is worth more study.

St. Melito of Sardis is believed to have composed a list of one of the earliest canons of Christian Scripture that we know of. Though his list did not come with a guarantee from any existing Magisterium, it did have some degree of authority at the time.

Council of Laodicea (c. 360) A local council of the church in union with Rome produced a list of books of the Bible similar to the Council of Trent's canon. This was one of the Church's earliest decisions in forming a canon for Christianity.

Council of Rome (382) - Local church council under the authority of Pope Damasus, (366-384) gave a complete list of canonical books of the OT and NT which is identical with the list later approved by the Council of Trent.

Council of Hippo (393)
Local North African Church council in union with and under the authority of the Bishop of Rome approved a list of OT and NT canon (same as later approved by the Council of Trent)

Council of Carthage (397) - Local North African Church council in union with and under the authority of the Bishop of Rome approved a list of OT and NT canon (same as later approved by the Council of Trent)

Which works belonged to the canon was debated for centuries before we finally knew which letters/writings we would declare as Sacred texts, but we also further edited Scripture by adding chapter and verse demarcation.

Two: the Church was the one who decided the canon of the Bible, the Bible did not justify itself as the Bible. In order to believe things outside of the Bible, there first had to be an agreed upon canon of scripture.

Three: Jesus says to observe all he has commanded (Matthew 28:20), but the end of John's gospel says that the Bible does not contain everything Jesus said or did, for to do so would fill volumes.

Four:"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."-2 Thessalonians 2:15

Five: "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."-2 Peter 1:20

Scripture verses come from KJV so no one can accuse of using a translations of the Bible that is biased towards the Catholic side (of course that would just mean it was biased towards truth)

Six: give specifics, many things people think aren't in the Bible, actually are in the Bible (praying for the dead, hints of purgatory, difference between particular and private judgement, saints, confession, annointing of the sick, holy orders, etc). Also, the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not in every Bible, depends on whether your translation accepts the Comma Johanneum

Short Story Long: One upon a time, after the final destruction of the Temple and the final end of Old Judaism, the Jews had a council called Jamnia, where they decided to close the canon of the Tanakh. They decided to get rid of all the books that only existed in Greek (and only kept the ones in Hebrew). They rejected the Septuagint, and the story goes either it was to remove books that seemed to support the doctrines of the Christians (for there is certain support in the Deuterocanonical books for certain Catholic practices) or some other reason. Even if the supposed council didn't exist, the Jews eliminated the greek books from their old Testament.

This caused some Christians to make different canons of scripture some not including these books, some inserting other books, until the Canon was eventually closed including all 73 books of the Catholic Bible during the Councils of the fourth century mentioned above.

Then comes Martin Luther, who had a dream that one day he could eliminate Catholic practices that seemed to contradict his doctrines of sola scriptura, sola fide and whatever it is he taught. Famously, he almost eliminated the Epistle of James ("the epistle of straw") because of the line "faith without works is dead" and "not by by faith alone." He liked Saint Paul because he said the "the just live by faith" to which Martin Luther decided he was above the curse written in the Apocalypse, and so decided to add alone to the quote. Then again Luther also expressed doubt about the canonicity of the Apocalypse, and Jude and Hebrews.

Because the Deuterocanonical books supported certain Catholic doctrines he felt were extra-biblical like praying for the dead, and because they were not in the Hebrew scriptures, he decided to eliminate them. That is why Protestants do not accept Tobit, Judith, Maccabees, Baruch, and the others.

Is it true no one was allowed to read the Bible before Vatican II/Council of Trent/Spanish Inquisition, etc? (This I've heard from many people, I've never believed it but couldn't answer it except by saying no)

I don't know about not being allowed to read the Bible before (whenever), but I would guess that Bibles were chained to pews back then because they were incredibly valuable before the invention of the Printing Press. Gold leaf, and all...
But it would make no sense to say that the Church did not allow people to read the Bible at any time. It would make sense to say that most people did not know how to read at said time.

I do not think so. The Didache is considered the work of the apostles, or at least written before the death of John, was rediscovered recently (I think) and no exception was made. If it ain't in the Bible now, it won't be in the Bible. However, works like the Didache and such are given high placement in the Church, as readings of the Apostolic Fathers, things that are good to read to increase the knowledge of the faith and to grow in holiness. Thus 2 Romans or such, would be considered as such.

I've heard of this answer before, but I haven't really found out the reasoning behind this. I can understand how John the Baptist was the last prophet since prophets were generally (in a larger sense) proclaiming the coming of the Messiah. Can anyone shed some light on this please?

The Bible is true because of our faith and belief in the truth behind the Bible.

Last time I checked the Protestant canon and Catholic canon is different based off of Martin Luther and the reformation. The Protestants did not agree with some of the Catholic church teachings. Including the, I think seven, books in the Bible which the Protestant Bible is missing as they felt it did not contribute to the teachings of the Bible.

Could we potentially add books to the bible? For example why don't we add the works of someone like Thomas Aquinas to the Bible? How about if we find some ancient manuscript from the time of the others?

public revelation was said to be closed at the time of the death of the last Apostle, St. John. With his death came the end of public revelation. Everything needed for salvation was said to be taught before that, that is what tradition hands down.

(For the New Testament) one condition is it must have been written during the Apostolic age (from the time of Jesus to the death of St. John the Apostle). For the narratives, must have been written by someone who was an eyewitness, or had eyewitnesses as sources. The letters had to be written by someone with authority in the Church during the Apostolic age (like say the Bishops (like Paul and the rest of the Apostles). This is an incomplete answer